July 25, 2012

Edmonton IndyCar Race Draws 194,000 U.S. Viewers

The NBC Sports Network broadcast of the IndyCar race at Edmonton on Sunday afternoon drew 194,000 viewers in the U.S. according to John Ourand, Media Reporter, Sports Business Journal.

Ourand tweeted the numbers in response to a query on Tuesday. He did not say what TV rating number 194,000 viewers equated to. For comparison, the NBC Sports Net TV rating for Iowa was a 0.18 with 254,000 viewers.

Predictably the ratings created a stir on Twitter. And just as predictably the reactions were in several familiar camps.

My reaction was alarm that so few people tuned in. A lot of others said "don't worry; be happy." There was also the usual declarations of love for IndyCar, ratings be damned. And, of course, the accusations of Negative Nellyism when these inconvenient indicators of poor long-term health are mentioned.

I understand all of said reactions. But for me it was yet another indication that IndyCar needs to focus on its health if it wants to be around next decade. It's kind of like a buff, gifted athlete who has a 301 cholesterol number. That needs to be addressed, even though the patient says he feels fine and he has a body fat reading of 5% and makes fans swoon just jogging by. All fine and dandy but if the 301 cholesterol number isn't addressed the patient won't be around to admire for decades to come. I kind of want the patient (IndyCar) to be around long term (next decade), so no rose-coloured spectacles for me.

These numbers are yet another teaspoon added to a dumptruck full of evidence that IndyCar does not have enough fans to make its business plan work into, say, the 2020s. Therefore, retaining current fans and attracting new fans should be the absolute highest priority for the league, the drivers and the teams. Right now teams and league management squabbling about aerokits and a 19-race schedule is like two crusty old men dying of thirst in the desert standing around arguing about whether they should have chicken or fish rather than working together to find water.

I love IndyCar too, which should be obvious given the unpaid hours I put into the dog blog. I love it enough to do more than just take my enjoyment from it until it dies or live in denial of the warning signs. But, there's not a ton I can do to improve the league's long-term health besides publicize and promote it on this insignificant blog, talk it up to my friends, wear my IndyCar stuff all the time, etc. Oh and point out the warning signs many don't want to see or deal with and offer ideas for improvement.

Yes, I'm regularly critical of IndyCar here, but before you lob your negative nelly accusations at me, check the entirety of this blog. The vast majority of it is in support of IndyCar. Extolling virtues, identifying weaknesses, seeking ideas for improvement. This has never been nor will it ever be a blind booster blog for IndyCar. There are plenty of other blogs who do that, so I encourage you to read them if that's what you seek. As for me, I'll continue to point out that, while those who love him think he's dead-sexy as is, the patient's cholesterol level is 301.

The ratings are REALLY bad this year. Ironically, one of my few positive predictions over the off season was an expectation of ratings improving. And people call me too negative... What I find really disturbing is that it's year four of the Versus/NBC Sports contract and the ratings are still crap. Some people say it "takes time" but it's been five years since Unification, four years since Versus, and it is the third year since Bernard's been hired. Patience is one thing, but progress can't be that slow either. I also think potentially, Danica's leaving has hurt more than most people thought, and sadly, Chevy's entry hasn't brought as much publicity as I would have expected. Even though a lot of people disagree with this opinion, I really think picking up as many crossover NASCAR fans as possible is the best and fastest way to grow Indycar. Even just picking up half a million NASCAR fans would have a big impact. I also think Indycar needs to focus on marketing as an extreme sport but sadly the "purists" absolutely hate the idea and the Vegas incident seems to have turned some people off of it as well. That said, I really think racing in general needs to focus on the extreme sports market to grow with younger fans now and in the future.

So...what happened to all the new fans Rubens was suppose to bring to Indycar??? Remember...all those fans that were used as the arguement why Rubens...not some young up and coming driver....should be welcomed to Indycar on a red carpet.

I think Rubens is a good driver but feel that the time & effort would have been better served on a young driver (along with Newgarden) that Indycar's future could have been built on.

How many people watched the Edmonton Race in Canada? How many watched Sao Paulo in Brazil? How many Brazilians watched the Edmonton race in Brazil?

It is provincial to assume that the only way to monetize and create revenue from the IndyCar series is through a US TV market. Clearly that is the biggest market, but it is also one that is the most fragmented and populated by other heavyweight sports entertainment properties. Formula 1 is not the worldwide gorilla it is from tv revenue from a single geographic region. It is the aglomoration of revenue from a multitude of regions that makes it what it is.

Things are not good in the US TV market and IMO, it will take 5 - 10 years of better on track/on air product and nurturing of a new generation of fans to turn that around. If you can buy time to do that from international TV revenue DO IT. Watching TV ratings race to race wathcing/waiting for the white smoke from an overnight windall of TV viewers is not going to happen.

Three races in Canada? Two races in Brazil? If it builds a monetizable TV market in those places, DO IT. IMO, there are enough opportunities in the western hemisphere so that that jaunts to asia or europe are not needed.

SO yes Bill, as usual, this is somewhat of a tangent, but the point is that living, contorting and dying based on an Overnight US TV rating is not considering the whole picture where the health of the series is concerned. Gold star to you if you could track down and report international numbers as well.

Good on ya, PDog... your 'insignificant' blog is read by me and much appreciated... you keep it real and that is what anyone truly wants.

On to TV ratings, well, there is indeed a war going on btwn NBC execs and Randy Bernard... who knows if part of the lack of ratings are due to that war or not... remember, ratings are sooooo not an exact science, in fact, ratings completely suck since only about 10% of the population is keyed in to the system. Open all your junk mail, people... the 'survey' comes in a plain white envelope with a $5 bill as an incentive to complete the survey and be a part of the Neilson system for a few months... what horseshit! I got the envelope 2 or 3 years ago... I saw it with my own eyes!! My uncle in Florida has been asked to participate 3 times over the last 10 years... the kicker there? He NEVER watches TV!!! Wow.

So even though advertisers/sponsors rely on ratings, which sucks, it's all a political arm wrestling game that goes on and on and on.

What IndyCar should be doing is selling the at-track experience to companies (either B-to-B or incentives for employees), online promotions, giveaways and a-typical media stories. Why they didn't blow up the Arie Jr. presence on Bachelorette was beyond me... same way they didn't make a bigger deal of Helio when he was on Dancing w/the Stars... he freaking won the show and there was little to no fanfare or promotion from IndyCar's side. Again, WOW.

But, having said all of this, the cool news is that the movie comes out next year and that could be a serious game changer... let's all keep pimping the series as we have been doing for a long time and maybe 12 months from now we'll all be singing a slightly different tune.

I have been going to two IndyCar races per year, Indy and Milwaukee. I plan to begin including Iowa in the mix also. As for TV, I got rid of cable. Most cable programming is junk to me and it became too expensive to keep just to watch a few IndyCar races. I would do "pay per view" for an IndyCar race. What has really changed the TV entertainment game for me, however, is that most programs are available somewhere on the internet (HULU, YouTube, etc.) for a lot less money. So, by just waiting a day or two, I can watch what I want when I want.
I don't see the cable industry being viable in the future as it competes with the internet. Unfortunately, IndyCar is stuck on cable. For those races that I miss, highlights of the race are available in a day or two on YouTube, and in many cases are available in their entirety a bit later on YouTube. As internet connected TV's become more affordable and available, more and more people are going to ask themselves "why do we need cable". Advertisers, program producers, and event producers are having to rethink how they spend their money. Coca Cola has cut back on cable advertising.

So I don't get too worked up about TV ratings good or bad because I think the entertainment viewing habits of the American people are changing rapidly and moving away from cable. The internet is both a blessing and a curse depending on your point of view. Music CD sales are way down because with one click on YouTube you can listen to the track you want to hear without having to buy the CD. Musical artists have had to adjust to that reality to find ways to make a living. Pretty much the same with IndyCar. So the internet has become pretty much like network TV. It is mostly free, but you still have to sit through some advertising.

Well, I got a bit carried away here and I recognize that these are mostly observations without solutions.

Also worth noting on Neilson ratings, the black box data is validated against set top data from 5 of the 6 largest distributors in the country.

Set top data is collected by cable and satellite providers from the modems that are connected to the cable going into your house or the satellite modem with the phone cable in the back of it. It catches what your TV was tuned to every second of the day. The shortcoming with it is that if some one turns off the TV but not the box it still reads as "watched"

I don’t care how you slice and dice it, 194,000 viewers is NOT good. That means that approximately one half of the people who actually attended the 500 took the time to turn on their TV’s; about the same number of people that actually attended the Baltimore GP took the time to turn on their TV’s. Something is very, very wrong somewhere and I don’t understand it, because the racing has been excellent this year.

I think the people that are saying ratings are unimportant or inaccurate are whistling past the graveyard. Professionals that know polling and statistics (i.e., Gallup, Rasmussen ) will tell you that it depends on the sample size. They can sample as few as 1000 people and have a poll with a margin of error down around 4-6%. What is Nielsen’s sample size? I don’t know, but I do know that it has to be HUGE. I would bet their margin of error is close to 1%. Even if Nielson’s numbers are off by a factor of ten, due to YouTube, Hulu, etc., that means all of their numbers are off by the same factor and Indycar is still at the bottom of the heap.

I’m like you P-dog, I don’t want to sound like a Negative Nellie, but facts are facts, and they need to be addressed. After all that is said I have to add that the easy part is pointing out the problems. The hard part is coming up with solutions and I don’t have any. All I know is that something is very, very wrong somewhere and I don’t understand it.

With all respect to Julie, Rubens Barrichello was never under any obligation to save IndyCar. He is here because he couldn't find a ride in Formula One. Presumably, he will also return to Formula One if he can ever find a ride there again. This was and is a place for him to cool his heels and keep his racing skills sharp while having an opportunity to race with his good friend Tony Kanaan.

No driver can save a series that seemingly makes business decisions as if it wants to die. An entire grid of drivers can't do that.

I understand why nobody is watching ... the broadcasts are more painful than my last root canal. There have been moments where the pain subsided to the level of a dull headache, such as when Tommy Kendall was in the booth, but for the most part, they are friggin' AWEFUL.

Indycar needs to get a team in the booth that actually can convey EXCITEMENT, technical knowledge, remember which drivers are in which cars, and get a director who has a clue about how to put together a racing broadcast. Until then, Indycar is going to continue to decline in ratings (if that's even possible ...)

As Ron Ford says above, Indycar needs to look at using the internet more effectively. I'd recommend taking the race footage after the race and editing it down to 10 or 15 minutes of "action" with a new commentary soundtrack. Make it available to wireless users with iPads, iPhones, Droids, Kindle's, etc. The youth of America is living off their hand held devices, and alsmost everything they watch is from Youtube, or Hulu, or other such sources. Give them something short (they have the attention span of an ADD case on meth) and exciting, to compete with their video games and other shows. That's how to get to young folks, not more of the same lousy coverage on cable/broadcast TV.

Champ Car used to draw 100 000 viewers in Canda and is far and away still more populat then Hirl, despite being dead for 4 years.. I imagine Hirl gets about 20 000 viwers on TSN and maybe 5000 viewers on TSN2... I have never seen them in any ratings posted in Canada. Yet I have seen MLS ratings of 40 000 posted, so it is less then that.
Canada has 35 million people